FriedFishes

It either changes it completely or not at all, a tragic sort of syntactic ambiguity. Though, from the first few lines of the archived article someone else posted,

"We might some day have “AI Safety”, as a science or policy area, that is not primarily a sex cult in Berkeley, California, but it does not currently exist"

So in this case, "in Berkeley" does not change the meaning.

If I had more time I'd write a shorter letter, a la Pascal.

Editing is generally hard work, at the current token price I don't mind spending multiple passes of high effort to get down to a reasonable noise/signal ratio. I've seen some people pass off output to a weaker/cheaper model but that makes me a bit nervous when I don't have intimate knowledge of the subject.

I'll push back a tiny bit, though I agree that we ought not change how we write on the basis of AI-isms, and if I would always prefer something poorly written that a human has thought through than something perfect but vacuous.

The em-dash is great for a lot of things like to avoid comma splicing or to indicate a parenthetical remark, but is usually superfluous. The subject of "correct" writing can be a bit touch and go of course, but as a reader I really never want to deal with a writer using an em-dash to mimic how they would say something verbally, the dramatic pause into the punchline of the sentence pattern (personal opinion) sucks.

Sounds like a perfect opportunity to put in an edit with the Wikipedia page then :)

Considering Weber was publishing give or take a century ago, it not being state of the art isn't surprising. It's still influential because it established a lot of the tools used by modern sociologists, as well as providing a counterpoint to Marxist thought. Personally I'm mostly indifferent to the claim.

You're also misreading the claim, the Protestant work ethic is not claiming any virtue on anyone's behalf. Weber's claim is making a casual connection between the development of capitalism and religious covenant. It's certainly not the prescriptive theory you're making it out to be.

"less research intro trivialities that common sense says aren't worth the public funding"

In your eyes, science and research is a linear process, governed by some "common sense", in which important and high impact discoveries are found as an immediate and direct consequences of the previous important and high impact discovery?

I'm trying not to get angry at a stupid HN comment, but surely we can think through what we write sometimes.

"Recently I asked ChatGPT Pro—which I paid for to summarize financial spreadsheets; I’m not a hater—whether it was capable of viciously dismantling an argument I’d read about the stock market"

Huh, parataxis-embedded-in-em-dash-separated-subordinate-clause, somehow I haven't seen that one before.

It's an interesting article, though the author does the thing that professionals tend to do and project just that wince of extra significance to their particular line of work, in this case writing(programmers and engineers do this constantly frankly). I'm personally a bit more bleak than the author, if so much writing has been replaced by AI cliches which don't add much substance to the message being communicated, is it possible that we never were really communicating that well to begin with? I'm just not entirely convinced that where AI replaces human writing there was much of the transcendent human value the article broadly gestures at.

I will absolutely agree with the article on human hangups being part of the process of discovery. I think its important to be stuck and to be stuck often and restart and do the difficult work yourself, in writing and in other endeavors too.

> for years now ZCRX is less than half a year old. I'm so tired boss.

I can't quite make out if this is new or not. The attack vector here seems congruent with a similar exploit from a couple months ago [1]

But still might be an open threat. On the email thread Jens seems to think that this is already patched and in stable, he also points out that for this exploit to work (as written in the article) you already need escalated privileges [2] Catchy title though.

[1] https://snailsploit.com/security-research/general/io-uring-z...

[2] https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q2/448